Page 10 of 11
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:01 pm
by Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: CyrusSpitama
For those just signing up,
be sure to join the Project R on the main page to get some free stuff. WoT often ran campaigns like this and glad to see WoWS is doing the same. Recently obtained my Kuma and Myogi but I am struggling to do well with the Kuma. I am also having issues with my Watakaze. Seems it will be a long time before I earn my Isokaze. Honestly, the torp game escapes me a little still... This includes both aiming and evading them
Torps take practice. There's a reason the reloads are very fast on the early ships with them. Later, it's measured in minutes. You need to be able to use them efficiently (I can't; my hit rate is ~7-8%, although there's something to be said for "area denial" with them also).
The Kuma is a bit of a funny ship. It's great, I love it and kept mine instead of selling it when I had upgraded out of it. But it's like the Tenryu at Tier 3 as well - fast and sleek with torpedoes, but its health just does not stand up to its USN (and now German) counterparts. The Kuma has great guns, too. Essentially, use your guns to kill DDs. Save your torpedoes for cruisers and battleships. Use AP rounds against the Phoenix and Karlsruhe (and Tenryu/Kuma) when within range to consistently land penetrating hits (probably under 7km), but stick to HE rounds for the Kolberg and St Louis - their armor is too thick for your AP to do any good.
You need to play the Kuma like it's a bigger DD. You can't brawl with it. It's a skirmisher. But it's really good at it.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:04 pm
by Panther Bait
It took me quite a while to catch on to this, but one of the keys to using torps on DDs is your visibility range vs. your torpedo range. If your torps have a long range than you can be spotted, you will do well. Just don't fire your guns as they will spot you then.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:05 pm
by Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: Barb
Well I am at Tier III ... It is quite funny game, but I feel it is more like "shooter" than everything other.
However there are few things that
seems to be really insane so far
-
Torpedo reloads on low tier ships - Hell you can fire full torpedo broadside every 20 seconds unlimited number of times! Yes the Russian Torpedoes have range of only 3km (US - 5km), which is awfully small, so you are usually almost dead at that range. Yet few times I got into the melee against three or more ships sinking 3 of them within 3 torpedo salvoes - the last one usually after I got sunk
IRL - only the Japanese had the quick torpedo reload system allowing them to reload tubes in about 10-15 minutes (based on number of tubes). Other nations were not so quick. Another thing is that Ships usually carried enough torpedoes for only 2 salvos (one in tubes and one spare)
-
Detection system - with the way it works currently, destroyers are "not able" to fire their guns unless already detected - and that is usually the close to the torpedo range... So to deliver torpedoes they are not using their guns - IRL... every possible barrel would be firing with maximum effort to pump whatever at the enemy at that range...
- I had read somewhere the
"detection ranges of torpedoes" based on hydrophone equipment. IRL you can hardly hear something running full speed ahead - and did battleships carry hydrophones? And use them while shooting? Also later Japanese torpedoes were using oxygen for propuslion making them much harder to detect on surface.
- I also find strange that they merged
light and heavy cruisers into the single line (Like Cleveland preceding Portland etc..) - They had each their specific role and number of classes is more then sufficient for the nations included.
-
Decision to include Soviet Navy (destroyer line so far) was probably based on huge Russian market... but wouldn't it be more logical to include Royal Navy (one ship only), Kriegsmarine (cruiser line) and Regia Marina (nothing) before the Russians?
However one can find me there from time to time as "BarbSVK" doing some silly things around
I agree with your assessment of flaws. Mostly, this was for playability, I imagine.
There are rumors that eventually they will split the light/heavy cruisers into separate lines. I know the proposed Royal Navy line has both Battlecruisers and Battleships listed (although again, rumors, so take with salt). I also have questions about why they chose certain ships for certain tiers (and why the Cleveland has that ridiculous rainbow arc to its shells), but it does leave them openings for premium ships (such as the Tone or Agano). Or Brooklyn, for that matter - I'd buy a Brooklyn.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:07 pm
by Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan
ORIGINAL: Apollo11
Hi all,
Nice! [:)]
BTW, I didn't know that you have your own YouTube channel - I bookmarked it as well... [:D]
Leo "Apollo11"
Thanks! I just started it a few months ago. It can be time consuming to do the videos the way that I want.
I'm almost tempted to create a chronicle of the astonishingly disastrous AE game play that I'm in right now. Hint: China has been totally subjugated by my Japanese opponent.
After doing my supporting videos for the CV reaction bug, I debated doing some kind of video AAR. It would take forever to splice together, though. But in a way, I think it's about the same level of effort as doing daily (or semi-daily) updates with good screenshots, just spread out more. Reminds me to check in on Baloogan's thing...
Also, my name in Warships is JesusOnIceSkates. The buddy I play with a lot is SweetFancyMoses. We mostly play T5-T8.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:56 am
by CyrusSpitama
Kuma, Myogi, and now the Isokaze. Still no t5 ships for me yet. Not sure which I will hit/get first. Hopefully this time spent with Isokaze and Kuma will greatly improve my torpedo work. One drawback to this WoWS time is I have not been able to open AE at all since just before last weekend... lol! Maybe once I win the lottery I won't have to worry so much about work and can game all I need to/want to. Of course, the gaming would take place between my round the world touring. [;)]
P.S. I could research and buy the first Jap CV but, avoiding this part of the game at present. Of course, if someone here recommends it highly I might give it a go.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 2:58 pm
by Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: CyrusSpitama
Kuma, Myogi, and now the Isokaze. Still no t5 ships for me yet. Not sure which I will hit/get first. Hopefully this time spent with Isokaze and Kuma will greatly improve my torpedo work. One drawback to this WoWS time is I have not been able to open AE at all since just before last weekend... lol! Maybe once I win the lottery I won't have to worry so much about work and can game all I need to/want to. Of course, the gaming would take place between my round the world touring. [;)]
P.S. I could research and buy the first Jap CV but, avoiding this part of the game at present. Of course, if someone here recommends it highly I might give it a go.
I don't like them.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 5:18 pm
by Denniss
Jap CV are nice but bomber-heavy, they always lack sufficient fighters. Not nice to see your 4-fighter group eliminated by US 6-fighter group. If playing wise you may gain a lot of money/experience per battle though.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 6:51 pm
by Anachro
Taking down 2 battleships with 2 straight torp salvos in a row from my Wakatake is satisfying. I took them down and then the destroyer that was with them fled at the sight.[:D]
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 7:15 pm
by Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: Denniss
Jap CV are nice but bomber-heavy, they always lack sufficient fighters. Not nice to see your 4-fighter group eliminated by US 6-fighter group. If playing wise you may gain a lot of money/experience per battle though.
Not to mention you can't really run an effective setup as Japan until Hiryu, when you can get 3 fighter, 2 bomber, and 2 torpedo bomber groups (all of 4). I have the Zuiho now and dislike it. I have to play really conservatively with my planes if I am facing a Bogue - they get 2 fighter groups, and I don't even have the option to change mine around to 2 groups. I don't like what they did with that. I should have the option to go fighter heavy at each tier if I want to.
Ryujo can go 3 fighter groups, but at the expense of bombers. Again, I don't like how they put in the air wing options. It would be far better if you could simply remove one type to add another instead of just getting 2 alternate setups to pick from, some of which just straight up increase your number of groups by 1 (which is dumb IMO). This would mean 4 alternate setups:
-1F, +1DB
-1F, +1TB
-1DB, +1F
-1TB, +1F
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 10:37 pm
by Anachro
Is it normal to have a 99% win ratio and 3.35 KD Ratio with 100 battles fought...I feel like I've been getting lucky with my battles. Most tend to be one-sided.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:12 am
by Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: Anachro
Is it normal to have a 99% win ratio and 3.35 KD Ratio with 100 battles fought...I feel like I've been getting lucky with my battles. Most tend to be one-sided.
Are you playing against bots? [;)] My win rate against humans is just over 54%.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:30 am
by Anachro
I have no idea. Do I have to change something in my settings to not be playing bots?
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:22 am
by JocMeister
ORIGINAL: Anachro
I have no idea. Do I have to change something in my settings to not be playing bots?
You are probably playing CO-OP. You need to switch to "random battle" to play humans. [:)]
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:33 pm
by Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: JocMeister
ORIGINAL: Anachro
I have no idea. Do I have to change something in my settings to not be playing bots?
You are probably playing CO-OP. You need to switch to "random battle" to play humans. [:)]
The major difference is that you'll now have games with 12 ships per side instead of 8. The bots are actually pretty good individually, but rarely surprise you and don't work together all that well.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:58 am
by CyrusSpitama
Funny thing is I finally got my first t5, the Furataka. I am not so far away from another t5, the Kongo. End result of all this WoWS playing? I just restarted my JPN GC scenario 2. My last attempt at a GC saw me just about to break into '43 but, my supplies and HI reserves were woefully under par. I do believe this is due to my recurring problem with taking Singapore and Palembang early enough. Time for another go at it! I do hope to see myself at least knocking down some forts to both of these places no later than early March. Ideally, I can see from many AARs, taking Singapore early as possible is the gateway to good times in the DEI.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:32 am
by fulcrum28
I have been tempted to buy it too, but in spite of the fact the graphics are superb -and I'm pretty sure it can be quite fun to manage the ships- it might not have strategy and/or tactical solid grounds, if compared with something like witp ae. I think it is something like world of tanks and in modern scale like wargame airland battle. RT games are difficult to control and do not allow you too much reaction time or considerations. But yes, all graphics shown in youtube are quite impressive.
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 10:27 am
by fulcrum28
I just checked it out and i was surprised to learn it is a free game [X(]
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 4:03 am
by Barb
Well actually it is not free... just "freemium" - that is most content is free, but if you want bonuses (experience gain, etc) and some special equipment, you will have to invest real money!
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 11:34 am
by stretch
It's Free-mium. the "mium" is Latin for "not really"
(South Park, S18E06)
RE: OT : World of Warships
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:10 pm
by Lokasenna
I look at freemium games, if done correctly, as "pay what you want." The much-maligned "freemium" games are actually Pay To Win, not freemium.
With true freemium games, you can pay a little bit here and there, and as long as you are OK with spending your money in such a fashion, it's no big deal. For context, I've spent somewhere around $60 US on Warships since July. I probably won't spend much more on it. But $60 is about what I'd spend at full price for any big ticket game, so is that unreasonable? I don't think so. Same thing with the other freemium I play, League of Legends. Since May 2009, I've probably spent $150 US on it, but the amount of time I've spent mostly-enjoying that game compared to the amount of gaming time I'd get out of a similar amount of money spent on other titles... it still compares favorably to me. It's just all about how you want to spend your money. If it isn't worth it to you to spend money on the game, then don't - you don't need to in this case.
The real-money items that you can get in Warships are marginal upgrades to the existing free versions. They won't win or lose you the game in most circumstances.